This is a phenomenen that I am seeing more and more, as Smartphones start to penetrate the market for normal "dumb" phones.

This isn't restricted to a single brand or OS either. I know iOS and Android users who come into this category.

The problem comes with the smartphone being pushed at the "unwashed" masses, who don't use the internet and don't know anything about mobile phones, other than how to type in a phone number and make a call. They are having smartphones foisted on them by the networks, whether they want/need them or not.

I lent my other half one of my smartphones recently, when the battery on her old Nokia 6100 started bulging and not holding a charge (I wonder why!). I ordered a new battery and she used my smartphone for a couple of days. As the 6100 has no real 'net connectivity, her contract doesn't have a data allowance, so I turned off the data functionality on the dervice, so that she didn't have any nasty surprises. She couldn't wait to get rid of the toyphone and get back to her realphone.

Likewise, at work, I have several colleagues, who have company iPhones, but, apart from the initial activation, they have never been connected to a computer, which means that many are still running iOS 3.x or 4.1, 4.2 etc. Most of them weren't even aware that they could/should connect them to a PC in order back them up. Similarly, while they are company phones, they never download apps on them, or when they do, they would never pay for an app, because the iPhone isn't theirs, so it would be a "waste" of money. At least these iPhones have a data contract and can surf the web and get e-mail (company Exchange Server).

Then I have come across a few users (see my rants and raves post from this morning), where they get given a smartphone (in the case in R&R, an htc Sensation), where it "isn't working properly". The network has released 6 updates to the firmware and OS since he got the phone but, because his SIM card came out of a dumb phone, it didn't actually have the internals / connections to allow for a GPRS or 3G connection. Heck, these people don't even have webmail accounts with Google, MS, Yahoo! etc. so they can't even get their contacts synchronised to the 'phone! In this particular case, the contacts were all still on the SIM card and hadn't been copied into "contact list" on the phone, so he was worried he would lose all his contacts, when he inserted the new SIM card in the Sensation - he was actually talking about putting the new SIM in his old Nokia and using the Nokia BT vCard exchange functionality to copy the contacts to the new SIM card (which Android doesn't support, I believe).

In the end, I connected the Sensation to my WLAN network and spent the best part of an hour installing one update after another, then copying the contacts from the SIM card into the phone itself, but he is still not certain, that he won't lose his contacts, when he switches SIM cards!

For these users, a smartphone is more of a liability than a useful tool. Apple, Google and their manufacturers are slow getting security fixes out the door for their 'phones anyway, but when they are never connected to a PC or a WLAN network anyway, it doesn't really matter, whether they release updates or not!

And the users have little or no idea of what the 'phone can do and mainly complain about how poor the telephone experience on these devices is, compared to their old mobilephone.

Smartphones are great for the techy crowd, but they shouldn't be foisted on those that don't need them and don't understand the benefits they could bring. It causes more problems, especially for the techy friends of these users, who get bombarded with questions and requests to help and the 'phone manufacturers get a bad reputation, because the users use 5% of the functionality, and the 5%, that doesn't work as well as a traditional 'phone.

Every form of technology must have users who don't use or even know about every function. I think the issues with IT products that makes them stand out more are the vulnerabilities that make them someone else's problem.

I wouldn't buy a smartphone as I know I don't need and wouldn't use even a fraction of the capabilities. Likewise I wouldn't buy a car with proximity sensors as I have spatial awareness and know how to park. No doubt in the near future they will be standard on every vehicle, but I'm not going to be paying a premium for them now.

I have a love-hate relationship with my HTC. Nice toy, crap phone. I've many times considered going back to my old Nokia 6300 which was a great phone, but rather limited in the toy department.

The main complaints are battery life (about 30 minutes of Angry Birds), the unpocketabilty (I shoulda got the smaller one) and the fact it takes twice as long to do anything "normal" on it (like making a call). Plus I'm always accidentally doing things like phoning the wrong person, because even after a year of practice I can't reliably scroll the screen without clicking on something... a fact I can't seem able to replicate, but happens all the time!

+1 JJ, though I'm not sure what technically makes a phone 'smart', mine's a bloody zombie...

+1,000,000

I know many people in office jobs who would be just as happy (in some cases more happy) using a typewriter as they would be using a computer and word processor...

Technology isn't for everyone and the way we force technology on everyone is just wrong.



Sounds like one of the cheaper Android phones with a crap screen and battery?

HTC Desire HD - it was pretty much the most expensive phone on the market.

Hmm, I get about 2 hours of Angry Birds out of my Sensation.

Interestingly, I use my Mozart as a "dumb" phone now - it is my company phone, but it won't talk to our Exchange server (totally botched certs, which WP7 calls a security risk and won't talk to - iOS, Android and Symbian tell me the certs are dodgy and a security risk, but they do let you continue at your own risk), so I just use it for SMS and outgoing calls, having redirected the number to my private number. I find that it only needs charging every 3 or 4 days.

But at least JJW is using it as a smartphone, even if it is just for a 30 minute fix of Angry Birds

The group of people I see have no idea what a smartphone is, or why they would want one, but they get one foisted on them anyway - either by their employer or by the network provider.

I got about the same on my iPhone.
Then I deleted it because it's rubbish.

Yeah. Getting two hours of life playing Angry Birds requires you to play Angry Birds for two hours. That's about one hour fifty minutes longer than it deserves.

Jon

But, but, casual/mobile gaming is totally the future!

My Samsung Galaxy S gives me about 5 hours of Robo Defence, which passes the time waiting for something where I would otherwise just be waiting impatiently drumming my fingers.

Got rid of Angry Birds pretty quickly, along with a host of other apps which start out innocently but then get updates that allow them permission to access EVERTHING. This is something that I suspect will be an issue for a lot of non-tech users.

I wanted a smartphone for things like email and mobile internet surfing more than anything else. I love some of my apps and have spent a fair whack on games too.

Both my sisters have smartphones but they use them to varying degrees. My mother had a phone with a keypad but also touch screen. She finds the screen a complete PITA to use and even I've had difficulty with it.

My Samsung's similar, but it's pretty sh1te full stop.